Fedora 17 - Only one kernel

[Bryn M. Reeves]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 07/10/2012 02:31 PM, Mateusz Marzantowicz wrote:
> On 10.07.2012 11:26, Dave Cross wrote:
>> On 10 July 2012 10:15, Mateusz Marzantowicz
>> <mmarzantowicz at osdf.com.pl> wrote:
>> 
>>> Is it possible that broken kernel which won't boot or cause any
>>> other serious problems is released in Fedora 16 or 17? I know
>>> that in Rawhide something might go wrong, but in 16, 17?
>> It's happened to me more often than I'd like. Probably once per 
>> release (and I've been using Fedora right from the start).
> 
> Lucky me, I can't remember going into such unpleasant situation
> with different Linux distros so I thought only one kernel will be
> enough.

I don't recall the last time that it happened to me but of course
everyone's mileage varies.

> Maybe having two kernels installed is more comfortable, you'll
> never know when something breaks. I must reconsider my initial
> idea. Thanks a lot for any thoughts.

This has long been considered best practice - when I was teaching RHCE
classes 8+ years ago we always advised a kernel update procedure like:

- - install new kernel
- - reboot to test
- - remove old kernel

That way you have a get out if for any reason the new kernel will not
boot or proves unreliable.

Of course, there's rarely any harm in skipping the last step and not
removing the kernel until later. This was back in the days of manual
updates with rpm -i/F but it carries over to yum equally well (there
was a yum plugin, installonlyn, that used to automate this but I don't
see it at the moment).

Regards,
Bryn.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk/8M8wACgkQ6YSQoMYUY96/jQCfY3/IYz+cllJBxN1QxcT0QT29
W/UAoMTwWuAcG1Ki26YIY/2l0+HVOwYq
=lLbM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----